Blogger's 'substantial donation' over tweet about Ganley was €50
The “substantial donation” made recently to the Poor Clares after businessman Declan Ganley threatened legal action over a controversial tweet was €50.
Blogger Kevin Barrington apologised online to Mr Ganley on January 2nd, using a wording sought by Mr Ganley through his solicitor, Belfast defamation lawyer Paul Tweed.
Mr Barrington was threatened with court action as a result of a tweet he wrote on November 12th, 2012. Following communications between Mr Tweed and Dublin solicitor Robert Dore, acting for Mr Barrington, the apology and payment were agreed.
“I wish to unreservedly apologise to Declan Ganley for my tweets of 12th December 2012,” Mr Barrington said on his blog and Twitter account. “To reflect my regret I have made a substantial donation to the Poor Clares.”
Mr Barrington’s apology on Twitter was retweeted by Mr Ganley. Yesterday Mr Ganley said he did not want to comment on the matter.
Mr Tweed said the wording published had been sought by his client. He said the amount had been agreed following communications between the two sides, including representations on Mr Barrington’s behalf.
He said the primary focus for Mr Ganley was to get a full retraction and the removal of the offending tweet. Earlier this week the apology received extensive coverage in the media as it is believed to be a first for an Irish tweet.
This article was amended on March 26th with the following text:
We have been asked by Declan Ganley’s solicitor, Paul Tweed, to clarify what he feels may have been a misleading report in the edition of January 11th last relating to the settlement Mr Ganley had reached with a blogger.
Mr Tweed has pointed out that his client had demanded from the blogger a full retraction, an unreserved apology and a substantial donation to charity together with other specific undertakings.
Following acceptance of all these terms, and having taken into consideration a number of fundamental factors relating to the blogger’s circumstances,€50 was acknowledged as being a substantial donation for him.
Mr Tweed also points out that Mr Ganley at no time sought confidentiality regarding the actual amount of the charitable donation. We regret any misunderstanding.